RAJENDRA GANPATI PATIL AND ANR vs AMIT ENTERPRISES HOUSING LTD AND ORS — WP/6035/2026

Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010212032026

Filing Number

WP/12357/2026

Filing Date

24-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/6035/2026

Registration Date

30-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJENDRA GANPATI PATIL AND ANR

    Adv. jaiwant s. chandnani associates

  2. 2.NEELAM RAJENDRA PATIL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AMIT ENTERPRISES HOUSING LTD AND ORS

  2. 2.SANJEEV GOVIND PATEL

  3. 3.KISHOR GOVIND PATEL

  4. 4.ROHAN KISHOR PATEL

  5. 5.ABHISHEK JAGMOHANLAL KHANDELWAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

    Case Summary: WP 6035/2026 The Bombay High Court partially allowed the writ petition and quashed the trial court's rejection of the petitioners' application to amend their plaint beyond the 14-day period. The High Court found that the Civil Judge erred by overlooking Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which permits courts to extend time limits. The case was remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration on merits with proper hearing to both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  4. 24-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/6035/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 6035/2026 The Bombay High Court partially allowed the writ petition and quashed the trial court's rejection of the petitioners' application to amend their plaint beyond the 14-day period. The High Court found that the Civil Judge erred by overlooking Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which permits courts to extend time limits. The case was remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration on merits with proper hearing to both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case